- From: <Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com>
- Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 16:23:38 +0200
- To: <GK@NineByNine.org>, <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Cc: <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>, <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
> -----Original Message----- > From: ext Graham Klyne [mailto:GK@NineByNine.org] > Sent: 17 January, 2003 14:30 > To: Brian McBride > Cc: rdf Core; pat hayes > Subject: Re: Fwd: problems with RDF datatyping > > > > At 11:32 AM 1/17/03 +0000, Brian McBride wrote: > > > From PFPS: > > > >>In trying to make the OWL semantics correspond to the RDF > semantics I came > >>up with the following problems in RDF datatyping: > >> > >>1/ A datatype is an element of IR, because the RDF MT says > that datatypes are > >>denoted by URI references. However, rdf:XMLLiteral is said to be a > >>datatype, but rdf:XMLLiteral is a URI reference. Something > is wrong here. > > I think we should say something like "rdf:XMLLiteral denotes > a datatype". Hmmm.... I thought we did say that. If we don't we definitely need to fix that before last call. > >>It probably makes more sense to say that a datatype is a four-tuple, > >>consisting of a URI reference, a lexical space, a value space, and a > >>lexical-to-value mapping. > > I'm not sure I fully understand this, but the final suggestion seems > reasonable to me. Please see my comments for why I don't consider this reasonable. Patrick
Received on Friday, 17 January 2003 09:23:43 UTC